Thanks Miloch but I don't think there was any bashing going on
 

I don't know exactly what he's trying to achieve either.

This post has an explanation, with a nice picture as well, on what I am trying to achieve

I'm more concerned about synchronising 215 containing vef with other effects that are actual core of the ability, but I guess that's just another case of synchronisation. BTW toying with vef is a fun, mainly clean, process, I'm thankful you mention it to me back in that NI thread

 

What I'm more curious by now is the behaviour of sphlysmt.bam: how comes it sometimes work, and sometimes doesn't?

I have an effect for which I chose sphlysmt.bam as its graphical representation. Upon testing I noticed weird thing: it plays only in about 60% of times when the effect is used. I'm sure the effect itself happens as the second bam launches each time. The way I understand either the bam is broken and shouldn't play at all or it's fine and will play each time, thus I'm baffled by this random faultiness of sphlysmt.bam and would welcome any ideas on how it's possible at all?

Starting from its latest version G3Fixpack started handling basilisk's petrifying effect, so I need to rewrite my code for it to work with both not fixpacked & fixpacked games. To do so I need to be able to adjust saving throw bonus of all effects of a given spell, like this:

COPY_EXISTING crspl005.spl override
	LPF ALTER_SPELL_EFFECT
		INT_VAR
			match_opcode = -1
			savebonus = savebonus+2
		STR_VAR
	END

No doubt you have noticed a line that would not work . I'll try to study tomorrow myself on how should I change this code for it to work (I feel there will be a healthy dose of dreaded "read_byte" which I understood once, about 10 years ago, and forgot completely by now ), but if someone would lend me a hand with that it would be ever so cool!

 

Bonus question: if I accidentally alter save bonus for an effect having no saving throw at all, I won't screw anything, right, this save bonus simply will be ignored by the engine?

That's a generous offer I wouldn't miss for no hurry in the world I'll drop you details in PM shortly.

I was afraid of that. Guess I'll have to learn that old trickery once again Thank you Gwendolyne!

Thank you, this is an elegant idea but alas, not only I do lack #326, I'm also reluctant to touch main engine of basilisk gaze attack item: it is not a spell but embedded effects in vanilla, which at some point changes into .spl in Big World, so I will had to dynamically read and wrap said engine into my custom .spl - a feat I wouldn't dare even with the help of the community...

 

wait... ok it's 2AM so I might be wrong but...

 

subtledoctor, that is in fact brilliant! What if I insert, as a first effect, toned down by -2 version of the main gaze engine AND block original not toned down attack? That could actually work perfectly "on the old & busted engine" Now I wonder what will happen if I will give immunity to the gaze projectile from the middle of the stack of effects in this very same projectile

temnix, thank you for your suggestions, but unfortunately they are of little help in this exact case. See, I'm not looking to do something, anything, I am interested in the exact, to the letter, implementation of this:

Only if it will be totally dismissed as impossible I'll compromise, swaying as little as will be absolutely necessary

...Medusae? What medusae?

My 1 year old Big World installation has at least 2 Medusas: cmmedus.cre and f_medusa.cre, and Gwendolyne promised to bring more.

@1000 = ~\([Bb]asilisk\)\|\([Mm]edusa\)~

Hmm, do I get it right that I should put that (or rather translations thereof) in .tra files of my mod?

UPD. Indeed, forum software acting up lately

Argent77, I have no words, this is so cool, and I wouldn't hope to attain this ability to manipulate files even after a months of study! Thank you so very much
Not sure I understand every quirk of it though: for example why do you apply patch if "STRING_CONTAINS_REGEXP ~\(basilisk\)\|\(medusa\)~ = 0", should not it be "STRING_CONTAINS_REGEXP ~\(basilisk\)\|\(medusa\)~ = 1", as in, a hit?

As for subtledoctors good point about languages, I wonder if

READ_STRREF NAME1 name1 ELSE ~~
READ_STRREF NAME2 name2 ELSE ~~
READ_STRREF 0x272 race

PATCH_IF (~%name1%~ STRING_CONTAINS_REGEXP ~\(basilisk\)\|\(medusa\)~ = 0 ||
~%name2%~ STRING_CONTAINS_REGEXP ~\(basilisk\)\|\(medusa\)~ = 0 ||
race = ~BASILISK~ || race = ~MEDUSA~) BEGIN

would work as a temporary solution?

And you can add a check on MEDUSA race or animate.ids for an incoming mod.

Haha, I remember that, that's why a cared to bother with Medusas (Medusae?) at all

Yes, classic engine.

I am trying to make weapon attack modify target's saving throw before applying core effect of that attack.

 

My testing rig is a dart doing 1 damage upon target failing save versus death. Target have save vs. death 10, so under normal circumstances dart hits 10 times out of 20 attacks. Then I am adding prior (slot 0) effect #33 adding 6 to target's save. If that would work in theory hit to fired ratio should fall down to about 4 per 20 attacks, but testing gives same 10 of 20, so my #33 obviously not working.

I have filed it with target 2 (preset target), value 6, modifier 0 (increment), timing 0 (instant/limited), dispel 3 (dispel/bypass resistance), duration 0 and probability 100. Which of these is wrong?

 

I am attaching the item in question just in case.

As for workarounds, it would depend on why you cannot simply give the effect itself a save bonus/penalty.

I am making a shield which by design should give +2 Saving Throw against petrifying gaze of basilisks and medusas to its wielder. Sadly engine has no option to fine-tune saves: there's no modifiers to save vs. item or save vs. creature or save vs. spell, nothing, so I was unable to find a way to do so from shield's side.

 

The only thing I managed to come up with is to give all basilisk/medusa items which they use for ranged attack two additional effects, where first will make target immune to second, and second will always bestow +2 save vs. petrification upon target, and then give my shield immunity to the former of these two so only one using the shield will get that +2 save.

 

Oh, and it's for classic engine so no fancy opcodes for me

Confirming that in regard of its influence on the next effect within the same item ability:

these works as intended
Opcode:33, target=2, parameter1=0, parameter2=1(Set), timing=0, duration=0
Opcode:33, target=2, parameter1=20, parameter2=1(Set), timing=0, duration=0
 
while these doesn't do a thing
Opcode:33, target=2, parameter1=10, parameter2=0(Increment), timing=0, duration=0
Opcode:33, target=2, parameter1=-10, parameter2=0(Increment), timing=0, duration=0
 
kjeron, you seem to have first hand knowledge on these matters, any idea why so? Some engine flaw? Any workaround?

 

Edit: interestingly,
Opcode:33, target=2, parameter1=10, parameter2=0(Increment), timing=0, duration=1
works, as in displayed on charsheet, but doesn't affect next effect within the same use of the same item ability

I believe--and I'm sure I'll be corrected if this isn't accurate--that the engine rolls for saves on an item/spell once and at the time of the attack.

Thank you for an explanation! There goes down the drain my shield of +2 to save vs. petrifying gaze. And to think I've already made paperdoll and icon for it

Have you tried to delay the effect a second for the save throw to get reduced ? -got ninja'ed-

Nope. Will certainly try it out, thanks!

Edit: hmm, what field should I put delay amount to? "Special" (in terms of NI)? Or perhaps I should externalize it into Eff v.2 and use parameter 3?

Sam., can you please explain why would one want to compress bams at all especially considering hindrances you mentioned in the readme? Bams that are bmps made with photoshop and converted with Miloch's BAM Batcher, are they not compressed? Is it a bad thing? Why?

Thank you for this exhaustive explanation Sam!

Yep

I have finally finished version 0.2 of The Old Gold, and know what - it's now twice bigger!

 

Well someone might say it's only 10 items against 5 in previous release, but "twice bigger" got some nicer ring to it In addition to a new content it got compatibility with 1PP fixed and got some visual bits improved here and there.

Ok my english might suck but there's no way twice bigger and double the size means different things, you are pulling my leg here!

Yay indeed

You know, if you did actually show those 5 items the mod has to offer and maybe tell us how they are available in-game, people might be more interested in testing.

Right now, all the information you give is "this mod has 5 items". Not very much to go on...

You are correct, and thanks for the hint, but then again - what surprise would that be if I did so? And what are mods for if not to be surprised a little bit (and hopefully in a pleasant way) in a game you know inside out? Not to mention I have already fixed a bug of compatibility with 1PP, so I would rather have not over-exposure this until 0.2, which is 60% done by now.

 

BTW, two of these are actually shown in the logo

And it has glowing mushrooms too! Ahem... I meant, congrats on that release Lava

Not arguing with your personal experience I want to notice for the greater picture that I was able to finish the mod several times: apart for a nagging feeling there should been some other way to finish part 2 than by slaughtering all of duchess palace the mod was doable with the help of walkthrough.

Tho my issue with bard spells predates this failed Song/Silence installation. Any advice in that regard?

Contrary to your second post here you still haven't attached your WeiDU log. Note that it's not enough to just browse to needed file when composing a post, after that you had to click "attach this file" button.